Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2013
License: CC 0
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2013
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2013
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Eratigena herculea, COMB. NOV.

Authors: Bolzern, Angelo; Burckhardt, Daniel; Hänggi, Ambros;

Eratigena herculea, COMB. NOV.

Abstract

ERATIGENA HERCULEA (FAGE, 1931) COMB. NOV. (FIG. 12A, B) Tegenaria herculea Fage, 1931: 210, 211, fig. 47, female; Brignoli, 1977c: 69, 70, fig. 3, female; Ribera & Barrientos, 1986: 188–191, figs 1–3, male. Pseudotegenaria herculea: Lehtinen, 1967: 261. Types Holotype. Gibraltar: ‘ Cueva de San Miguel’, ♀ (MNHN, 1976, 507), 6.iv.1912. Other material examined Gibraltar (1 ♀); Spain (5 ♀). No males were available for examination. For figures of males see Ribera & Barrientos (1986). Diagnosis Eratigena herculea, E. hispanica, and three species originally described in Malthonica (E. arganoi, E. sardoa, and E. sicana, the ‘ Eratigena arganoi - group’) have the distal segment of PLS longer than basal segment (as in E. picta, E. balearica, and E. montigena; segment as long as basal in other species), short dorsal spike at male palp tibia absent (shared with E. feminea, E. incognita, E. inermis, and E. vomeroi, all other Eratigena gen. nov. species with spike), conductor with lateral margin entirely folded (as in E. picta and E. balearica, all other species with folded margin only at the terminal half), terminal end of conductor with one simple elongated peak (comparable with E. atrica, E. bucculenta, E. feminea, E. barrientosi, and E. incognita, in all other Eratigena gen. nov. species more complex), MA protruding, longer than wide, spoon-like (all other Eratigena gen. nov. species with the length of MA not exceeding its width, pocket-like), connection of MA to tegulum membranous (only similar in E. incognita), epigyne with a distinct posterior sclerite, forming a strongly sclerotized and protruding pocket-like structure (shared with E. bucculenta and E. feminea, all other Eratigena gen. nov. species without such structure). Eratigena herculea and E. hispanica can be separated from the ‘ Eratigena arganoi -group’ by the length of tibia I (longer than CL, in other species shorter than or equal to CL), the PMS bearing three to four cylindrical gland spigots laterally (others with only two), the shape of the dorsal branch of the RTA, the conductor, and the MA, the very long appendages at the CD (short or absent in other species), and the special form of the RC. From E. hispanica it differs in the smaller size (Ribera, 1978; Ribera & Barrientos, 1986; even though this character is strongly variable in many species of the genus, there are very few other discriminating characters mentioned in the literature), the shape of the RTA in dorsal view (Ribera & Barrientos, 1986: 190, figs 3, 5), the conductor not reaching the distal margin of the alveolus (reaching it in E. hispanica), the differently shaped epigyne (larger membranous part anteriorly of distinctly differently shaped posterior sclerite in E. hispanica), the absence of epigynal teeth (present in E. hispanica), and the distally less convoluted appendages at the CD (more elongated and convoluted in E. hispanica). Description Measurements: Measurements of males were provided by Ribera & Barrientos (1986). Female (N = 2): CL 2.96–3.16, CW 2.11–2.15, STL 1.53–1.56, STW 1.31– 1.33, OL 2.55–3.63, OW 1.67–2.65. Leg I (4.46, 1.19, 4.64, 4.77, 2.57), II (3.83–3.99, 1.04–1.16, 3.42–3.51, 3.68–4.09, 1.88–2.2), III (3.6–3.74, 1.02–1.05, 3.1– 3.24, 3.98–4.22, 1.72–1.93), IV (4.58–4.85, 1.04–1.07, 4.54–4.57, 5.62–5.91, 1.95–2.2). Pedipalp (1.57–1.59, 0.56–0.59, 1.11–1.17, 1.6–1.69). EPL 0.31, EPW 0.53, ATL 0.18, ATW 0.2. Eyes (moderately reduced): PME 0.04–0.06, PLE 0.05–0.06, AME 0.03–0.05, ALE 0.06– 0.08. Eye distances: PME- PME 2 x PME, PME–AME 1.5–2 x PME, PME–PLE 1.5–2 x PME, PME–ALE 2–2.5 x PME, AME–AME 1.5–2 x AME, AME- ALE 1.5–2 x AME, CLY1> 3 x AME, CLY2 2–3 x ALE. Male palp: No male specimen was available for examination. Relevant information was provided by Ribera & Barrientos (1986). Epigyne and vulva: Epigyne with a distinct posterior sclerite, forming a strongly sclerotized, triangularly shaped, and protruding pocket, opening posteriad. Epigynal teeth absent. CO located anteriolaterally of the posterior sclerite. Vulva consists of distinguishable CD, RC, and FD. CD short, with a long, distally somewhat convoluted appendix. RC irregularly formed and sclerotized with several ‘chambers’, separated by about 1.5 x their diameter. FD only represented by small, leaf-shaped appendages. Other important characters: Cheliceral promargin with three to four, retromargin with seven to ten teeth. Colulus rectangularly shaped with distal margin w-shaped. Distal segment of PLS longer than basal segment. PMS with one prominent minor ampullate gland spigot and three to four cylindrical gland spigots laterally. Tarsal trichobothria on cymbium and palp tarsus absent. Tarsal trichobothria seven to eight. Small teeth on paired claws of leg I 18. Leg spination: female palp (1–0–0–0, 2–0–0, 2–1+1p– 0), leg femora (2–2–1–0 or 2–2–3–0, 1–2–2–0 or 2–3– 2–0, 1–2–2–0 or 2–2–2–0 or 2–2–3–0 or 3–2–1–0, 1–1–1–0 or 2–1–1–0 or 2–1–2–0 or 2–2–1–0), patellae (all 2–0–0, one specimen with one retrolateral spine at patella IV), tibiae (0–0–0–1+1p or 0–1–0–1+1p or 2–2–0–1+1p, 0–2–0–1+1p or 2–2–0–1+2p or 2–2–1–2p, 2–2–1–2p+1 or 2–2–2–1+1p or 2–2–2–2 or 2–2–2–2p, 2–2–2–2p+1, or 2–2–2–3p, or 2–2–3–2, or 2–3–2–2), metatarsi (0–0–0–3p+1, 0–1–0–3p+1 or 0–2–0–3p+1, 0–4–3–2p+1 or 0–4–3–3p+1, 0–4–4–1p+1+2p+1 or 1–4–3–1p+1+2p+1), tarsi (I & II 0, III 0 or 0–0–1–0, IV 0–0–1–0 or 0–0–2–0). Coloration: Carapace not darkened (troglobiont?). Sternum with a weakly expressed pale median region. Opisthosoma brown-yellowish, only cardiac mark darker. Legs without a pattern. Distribution Records are known only from southern Spain (mainland and the Balearic Island of Ibiza) (Fage, 1931; Brignoli, 1977c; Ribera & Barrientos, 1986). Discussion The specimen from Lima Gesus (Malaga, Tolox) differs slightly from the other material: the conspicuously different run of the copulatory duct, the larger size, and the leg spination. More material is necessary to decide whether or not this specimen represents a different species.

Published as part of Bolzern, Angelo, Burckhardt, Daniel & Hänggi, Ambros, 2013, Phylogeny and taxonomy of European funnel-web spiders of the Tegenaria-Malthonica complex (Araneae: Agelenidae) based upon morphological and molecular data, pp. 723-848 in Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society (Zool. J. Linn. Soc.) (Zool. J. Linn. Soc.) 168 (4) on pages 766-767, DOI: 10.1111/zoj.12040, http://zenodo.org/record/5282985

Keywords

Eratigena, Eratigena herculea, Arthropoda, Agelenidae, Arachnida, Animalia, Araneae, Biodiversity, Taxonomy

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 1
  • 1
    views
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
1
Green